Depends on the cartridge and tonearm used.
TONEARM DAMPING : DAMPED OR NOT ? ? USELESS ? ? WELCOMED ? ?
Dear friends: This tonearm critical subject sometimes can be controversial for say the least. Some audiophiles swear for non damped tonearms as the FR designs or SAEC or even the SME 3012 that is not very well damped in stock original status.
Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.
In other thread a gentleman posted:
" If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".
In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:
" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "
At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:
https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/
Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm. ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.
The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.
That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation ( resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .
So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?
I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".
I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?
Thank's in advance.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
Some other audiophiles likes good damped tonearms.
In other thread a gentleman posted:
" If a cartridge is properly matched to the tonearm damping is not required. " and even explained all what we know about the ideal resonance frequency range between tonearm and cartridge ( 8hz to 12hz. ). He refered to this when said: " properly matched to the tonearm ".
In that same thread that a Triplanar tonearm owner posted:
" This is the one thing about the Triplanar that I don't like. I never use the damping trough...... I imagine someone might have a use for it; I removed the troughs on my Triplanars; its nice to imagine that it sounds better for doing so. "
At the other side here it's a very well damped tonearm:
https://audiotraveler.wordpress.com/tag/townshend/
Now, after the LP is in the spining TT platter ( everything the same, including well matched cartridge/tonearm. ) the must critical issue is what happens once the cartridge stylus tip hits/track the LP grooves modulations.
The ideal is that those groove modulations can pass to the cartridge motor with out any additional kind of developed resonances/vibrations and that the transducer makes its job mantaining the delicated and sensible signal integrity that comes in those recorded groove modulations.
That is the ideal and could be utopic because all over the process/trip of the cartridge signal between the stylus tip ride and the output at the tonearm cable the signal suffers degradation ( resonances/vibrations/feedback ) mainly developed through all that " long trip " .
So, DAMPING IS NEED IT AT THE TONEARM/HEADSHELL SIDE OR NOT?
I'm trying to find out the " true " about and not looking if what we like it or not like it is rigth or not but what should be about and why of that " should be ".
I invite all of you analog lovers audiophiles to share your points of view in this critical analog audio subject. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?
Thank's in advance.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS,
R.
- ...
- 318 posts total
For the highly-motivated: In the 90’s Townshend Audio offered for sale separately their Damping Trough, for installation and use on non-Rock tables. The DT Kit included the Trough, mounting plates (two, of differing dimensions) and hardware, a small bottle of damping fluid, and the requisite headshell-mounted plate and "paddle" (the little hollow aluminum tube that is mounted onto the headhsell plate and descends into the fluid). I’ve never seen one for sale on the second-hand market, but ya never know. Mine will be, but not until after I die. My ancestors (on both sides) lived relatively-long lives (into their 90’s), so don’t hold yer breathe ;-) . While I’m here, let me make something clear (if it isn’t already): The Townshend Audio Rock Turntable Damping system is not a "tonearm damper"; it addresses the issue of the tonearm/cartridge resonance that is inherent in the LP phono system, REGARDLESS of the specific arm and cartridge. For the complete story, read the Dinsdale papers (see above post), written after the research conducted at the Cranfield Technical College in England was completed. |
Dear @dover : "
Tonearm damping is a bandaid for poorly designed arms or turntables and/or mismatched arm/cartridge. " A bandaid?, well all after market devices as: protractors, mats, tip toes, still points, clamps, treatment, amp damping, TT damping, system item racks, power conditioners, power cables, etc, etc, according your point are bandaids for audio items poorly designed ones. Well, in audio does not exist any single audio item and after market devices that are PERFECT and that's why everywhere we need " bandaids ". All what you said already posted other audiophiles and through the thread to all of them were proved that they had a misunderstood about and that were not true their opinions and that damping is always welcomed, obviously you share with them the same misunderstood. Here some links that between other gentlemans @antinn shared with us that one way or the other tell us the damping needs no matter what. Obviously the @lohanimal links and posts as the bdp24 and from other gentlemans: https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1979-03.pdf ( page 33 ) http://www.laudioexperience.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Bruel-Kjaer-Audible-Effects-of-Mechanical-... https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1981-03.pdf ( page 21. ) https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/80s/Audio-1982-06.pdf ( page 24. ) https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-damping-damped-or-not-useless-welcomed/post?postid=20... After read all those information and even the whole thread if you insist in your false statement then please share with us your true. Regards and enjoy the MUSUIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
Dover is perfectly correct. Most of the stuffs Raul just mentioned are also band aides for poor design. Which means by this definition most turntables are poorly designed requiring numerous band aides. Some turntables like Technics Direct Drive and virtually all VPI table are so bad there are not enough band aides in the world to save them:-) This is the reason many of us are drifting toward digital program sources. How are you going to put a damping trough on a DAC. |
- 318 posts total